Keeping Alphabetical Browse in a Library Catalog

Alphabetical browsing offers a high degree of precision and has been a core organizing principle of human information over the last 4000 years. Should we also remove the A-Z journal list, our list of popular databases, our list of subject guides, and every other library tool that organizes itself alphabetically? Of course not. What's wrong with browsing among similar titles, among variant spellings of an author's name, or allowing users to choose between various subheadings attached to subject headings? I understand the alphabetical browse constituted a minority of the searches done in some libraries but the library offers any number of tools (RSS feeds, blogs, Facebook widgets) that require staff time to maintain but are used by a minority of users. If there are fewer searches being done with an alphabetical browse, maybe it is because people are finding what they want the first time. This functionality is critical where the Bible and other standard religious texts are represented by uniform titles and carefully structured subject headings.

Musical style and disrupting worship

I disagree with statements about "preserving the integrity of the worship" having mostly to do with maintaining a musical style and the implication that "disrupting the worshippers" wants and expectations is a bad thing.

First of all, "musical style" is itself a very slippery construct that has different cues to different people. Is it contemporary if there is rhythm section? Is it traditional if it uses an organ? What about churches the employ an organ and a rhythm section? What about churches that sing traditional hymns in their contemporary services and praise choruses at their traditional services? Should they be sued for false advertising? for destroying the integrity of worship?

Maybe I come from a generation that enjoys leaving my iPod on shuffle, but I see the various songs and musical styles of the church as one giant toolbox for worship. If it's communion Sunday, I want songs that talk about bread, about the body of Christ, about community, about saints, about banquets, about service. It is of secondary importance to me whether or not it is played on the organ, sung by the children's choir, or led by a praise band. The "integrity of worship" for me has much more to do with following the liturgical and scriptural themes for the day than maintaining a uniform musical style.

Finally. I'm not interested in getting people to come to church in order to meet their wants and expectations. I'm interested in getting people to come to church so that their lives (and wants and expectations) can be transformed by Jesus Christ. Our baptism is not learning the United Methodist secret handshake - it's a disruption, an inconvenient transformation, a death to the old self and the ways of the world, and a rebirth and resurrection in our Lord Jesus Christ. Worship planning ought to be less concerned about maintaining the "flow" and more about "disrupting" lives so that they might be transformed.